Citation Nr: 0828493
Decision Date: 08/21/08 Archive Date: 09/02/08
DOCKET NO. 04-28 691 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Louisville,
Kentucky
THE ISSUE
Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a
psychiatric disability.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Mark Vichich, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from March 1955 to January
1956.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA
or Board) on appeal from a March 2000 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Louisville, Kentucky, which denied the benefits sought on
appeal. The veteran appealed that decision to BVA, and the
case was referred to the Board for appellate review. The
Board remanded the case for further development in March
2007. That development was completed, and the case has since
been returned to the Board for appellate review.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management
Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the
appellant if further action is required.
REMAND
Reason for Remand: To schedule the veteran for a video
conference hearing before the Board at the RO in Louisville,
Kentucky.
In correspondence submitted in September 2005, the veteran
requested a hearing before a member of the Board in
Washington, D.C. The Board subsequently sent the veteran a
letter in June 2008 notifying him that he had been scheduled
for such a hearing on August 27, 2008. In correspondence
dated in August 2008, the veteran's representative indicated
that the veteran would be unable to attend the scheduled
hearing because of his failing health and requested that a
videoconference be scheduled instead. However, he has not
yet been provided such a hearing.
The failure to afford the veteran a hearing would amount to a
denial of due process. 38 C.F.R. § 20.904(a)(3) (2007).
Therefore, the veteran should be scheduled for a
videoconference hearing before the Board at that RO in
Louisville, Kentucky.
Therefore, in order to give the veteran every consideration
with respect to the present appeal and to ensure due process,
it is the Board's opinion that further development of the
case is necessary. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the
RO for the following action:
The RO should take appropriate steps in
order to schedule the veteran for a
personal hearing with a Veterans Law
Judge of the Board via video conference
at the local office in accordance with
his request. The veteran should be
notified in writing of the date, time,
and location of the hearing. After the
hearing is conducted, or if the veteran
withdraws the hearing request or fails
to report for the scheduled hearing,
the claims file should be returned to
the Board in accordance with appellate
procedures.
The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional
development, and the Board does not intimate any opinion as
to the merits of the case, either favorable or unfavorable,
at this time. The appellant has the right to submit
additional evidence and/or argument on the matter or matters
the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky
v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). No action is required of
the appellant until he is notified.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law
requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of
Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals
for Veterans Claims for additional development or other
appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2008).
_________________________________________________
JESSICA J. WILLS
Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).